If Noah's Ark is a true story...

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
N

Nancyer

Guest
#21
I think its simply a case of no explanation is possible to a non believer and no explanation is necessary to a believer.

I have to say I agree with this. In fact this is the basis of Atheism and the basis of Christianity. It's called Faith; Christians have faith that God's word is the truth and how we should live our lives. Atheists have faith that they themselves know what's best and therefore need no "higher power" to guide them so one must not exist.
That's still faith, just misdirected faith.
 
G

Graybeard

Guest
#22
I think we have no rights all barring one...the right to choose life or death and we are told to choose life.
 
D

DannyC

Guest
#23
I think its simply a case of no explanation is possible to a non believer and no explanation is necessary to a believer.

I have to say I agree with this. In fact this is the basis of Atheism and the basis of Christianity. It's called Faith; Christians have faith that God's word is the truth and how we should live our lives. Atheists have faith that they themselves know what's best and therefore need no "higher power" to guide them so one must not exist.
That's still faith, just misdirected faith.
There is a difference between faith in yourself without prior knowledge and lack of belief in a deity and therefore your best interests are not faith based but rational steps to a productive life.
 
Feb 17, 2010
3,620
27
0
#24
How did kangaroos, emus and platypuses get to Australia after Noah landed his boat?
Maybe on the backs of angels? If God can move and did move the stars to be where they are with His FINGERS, you think God cannot provide or multiply food and transport animals as HE SEES fit.

I look at Jesus taking a few fish and loafs of bread and feed 5000 people and then there is 12 baskets leftovers. More leftovers than what He started with. Then I think how can God and NOAH do this thing? Well again, it is God, and just as I cannot EXPLAIN ANY of His miricles, I also cannot explain the flood miricle. All I know is there is NO reason for me to doubt the fact that there was a flood and that one little wooden boat was what God used to do his miricle.

The same with Jesus. God used one Man, to save every person that will spend eternity with Him. You see my friend if we could have explainations for miricles, it would not be miricles any longer, and all can do them then! So I will give you the best advice EVER.... If you have a question about God and how HE opperates, ASK HIM. Who knows maybe HE SELECTS you to KNOW!
 
G

Graybeard

Guest
#25
I think we have no rights all barring one...the right to choose life or death and we are told to choose life.
HA...I wondered what happened to this post...it was intended for another thread!
 
Mar 15, 2013
190
0
0
#26
I think its simply a case of no explanation is possible to a non believer and no explanation is necessary to a believer.

I have to say I agree with this. In fact this is the basis of Atheism and the basis of Christianity. It's called Faith; Christians have faith that God's word is the truth and how we should live our lives. Atheists have faith that they themselves know what's best and therefore need no "higher power" to guide them so one must not exist.
That's still faith, just misdirected faith.
No, faith is belief without evidence. I don't believe in things without evidence and when it come to things
other than religion you don't either.
 
K

kenisyes

Guest
#27
never heard this before, can you post Scripture/elaborate please.
I can't post Scripture to prove something is NOT there. The best I can do is look in detail at the Scriptures where people say it is, and show it is not. I Pet. 3:20, note the word "excactly" or "only" is not there. It says only that 8 were saved in Noah's ark, and makes no mention about others being or not being saved somewhere else. I started with the Greek, because when we think of the word "all" or "every", we think in Greek, since our English concepts are derived from it. We do not realize that Aristotle spent 200 pages defining how to think, in his treatises on logic. We tend to read back into the Hebrew things which are not there.

For example, Gen. 7:4, "every living substance I have made I will destroy from the face of the earth" sounds to us like He will destroy everything. But it's clear the words don't mean that, since it is in a context where He saves Noah, the animlas, food, etc. What it must mean is that He will do something to everything that is not protected. The Hebrew "all" does not mean what we think of as "all". Gen. 7:21, the word "all" is not in the Hebrew, where it should be, if our usual theory is correct. In Gen. 7:23 "only Noah remained alive..and those in the ark with Him" is a mistranslation. The Hebrew is "ak", "surely Noah and those in the ark were alive." Nothing in Scripture says everything but the ark contents was destroyed.

Comparative mythology is quick to report that almost every culture has a flood myth. The normal explanation was for many years, that the sons of Noah told their children, and their children separated after Babel, and they took the flood story with them in confused form. Later, as scientific method proved that enough rain could not fall in 40 days to cover the highest mountain, the Scriptural story, as minsinterpreted, was rejected and replaced with the idea of memories of melting ice sheets. Once this was done, the comparative stories received greater prominence, because scientists wanted to prove Christianity wrong. Due to the greater prominence, we now know that people were saved in other parts of the world, because further scientific studies of mythology prove that myths do not garble in this manner when transmitted to descendants (this has to do with how humans think when they tell stories). The stories must be independent.

The correct story hinges on comparative archeomathematics, which demonstrates that the Chinese flood date, June 6-16, 3122, is compatible with the Hebrew, Sumerian, and Egyptian partial dates. The date similarity proves it was one event observed by different people. If this new theory is correct, one can look for another cause. I propose the cause is that the joined continents were fractured by an underside hit from the oscillating molten iron core of the earth. That separated North/South America from Africa/Europe/Asia, and dislodged Antarctica and Australia, and various islands. The land masses tossed up and down in the ocean, as rain fell. This simple solution accounts for all the mythological stories, and details that are not in the Bible, as Noah could not have seen them from his point of view. It also accounts for the "fossil record" and errant DNA and radioisotope evidence, and makes the 6000 year old earth possible. In order for this story to be true of course, other people had to survive apart from the ark, as their stories claim.

You can read my whole study in http://www.kenbehrens.com/Ancient Technology.pdf from my website.
 
S

stek

Guest
#28
Ok and why do we have both saltwater and freshwater fish?

Ever been to the Delta in New Orleans? I like to go trout fishing there when I can, Very interesting fact that when the waters combine, they contain both freash water and salt water fish. Fresh water is lighter than salt water. Fresh water has a density of 1.0 while salt water has a density of 1.025. The trout stay at the top of the Mississippi and swim around while just below them is salt water that they swim down and grab food from. Once while reeling in a trout a shark grabbed the line. That was fun.

Since fresh water is lighter than salt water, the ocean water would have never risen to level to contaminate the lakes streams and rivers from fresh rain water. They would have only been filled with fresh rain water. It was like it was a plan or something to destroy the wicked while not harming the earth for those God intended to spare.
 
S

stek

Guest
#29
Ever been to the Delta in New Orleans? I like to go trout fishing there when I can, Very interesting fact that when the waters combine, they contain both freash water and salt water fish. Fresh water is lighter than salt water. Fresh water has a density of 1.0 while salt water has a density of 1.025. The trout stay at the top of the Mississippi and swim around while just below them is salt water that they swim down and grab food from. Once while reeling in a trout a shark grabbed the line. That was fun.

Since fresh water is lighter than salt water, the ocean water would have never risen to level to contaminate the lakes streams and rivers from fresh rain water. They would have only been filled with fresh rain water. It was like it was a plan or something to destroy the wicked while not harming the earth for those God intended to spare.

H2O University - 3 thru 5 if you dont believe me.
 

Radius

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,138
180
63
#30
Ever been to the Delta in New Orleans? I like to go trout fishing there when I can, Very interesting fact that when the waters combine, they contain both freash water and salt water fish. Fresh water is lighter than salt water. Fresh water has a density of 1.0 while salt water has a density of 1.025. The trout stay at the top of the Mississippi and swim around while just below them is salt water that they swim down and grab food from. Once while reeling in a trout a shark grabbed the line. That was fun.

Since fresh water is lighter than salt water, the ocean water would have never risen to level to contaminate the lakes streams and rivers from fresh rain water. They would have only been filled with fresh rain water. It was like it was a plan or something to destroy the wicked while not harming the earth for those God intended to spare.
Thank you. I was going to post something similar with this. I agree with you. And even if the water doesn't mix, whose to say God didn't just supernaturally keep the freshwater fish alive in the sea water?
 
K

kenisyes

Guest
#31
Ever been to the Delta in New Orleans? I like to go trout fishing there when I can, Very interesting fact that when the waters combine, they contain both freash water and salt water fish. Fresh water is lighter than salt water. Fresh water has a density of 1.0 while salt water has a density of 1.025. The trout stay at the top of the Mississippi and swim around while just below them is salt water that they swim down and grab food from. Once while reeling in a trout a shark grabbed the line. That was fun.

Since fresh water is lighter than salt water, the ocean water would have never risen to level to contaminate the lakes streams and rivers from fresh rain water. They would have only been filled with fresh rain water. It was like it was a plan or something to destroy the wicked while not harming the earth for those God intended to spare.
I have been told that some mountain lakes contain salt water. Is this wrong? Or does it prove that something heavier than salt water was in the mix during the flood, as the Mayan Popul Vuh story claims?
 
Mar 18, 2009
190
2
0
#32
How did kangaroos, emus and platypuses get to Australia after Noah landed his boat?
Its a fairly complex question, but here's what I think is probable...

1) We don't know how many variations (if any) within the different animal kinds were put on the Ark to begin with. The Bible does say that there was at least one pair of every kind, along with seven of some others for sacrifices and such. This means that only strict kinds were on the Ark: dogs, cats, horses, kangaroos, etc. The different variations would occur later through breeding.

2) The Bible says that the waters of the Flood started receding, and after almost a year, the ground was dry. Not long after, God placed the fear of man into the animals, and they scattered across the world...but we don't know what the makeup of the Earth was at that point. There's evidence that land bridges were once usable between Asia and Canada, but they're underwater now. Similarly, there could've been stretches of land to other places like Australia, but they were destroyed by earthquakes and such. No one alive today knows for sure, but its possible that certain variations were trapped in various places when land bridges collapsed.

The story is true as stated in the Bible, NOT as taught in Sunday school. Nowhere does the Bible say ONLY eight people were saved. Look it up and check carefully. There were parts of the rest of the world that got saved, too.
Wrong, because God explicitly told Noah that everything with the breath of God in its nostrils would die in the Flood, except those who were on that boat.
 
Mar 18, 2009
190
2
0
#33
No, faith is belief without evidence. I don't believe in things without evidence and when it come to things
other than religion you don't either.
Faith is a choice to believe in anything without 100% irrefutable proof...but that applies to a lot more than just religion. A classic example is gravity, which to prove beyond all doubt, you'd have to drop every item in existence from the same height forever. But at a certain point, we realize its no longer reasonable to doubt specific things. I can't prove beyond all doubt that any deity exists, because I'm not eternal...but I believe a rational look at the evidence lends more support to a Biblical conclusion.
 
S

stek

Guest
#34
I have been told that some mountain lakes contain salt water. Is this wrong? Or does it prove that something heavier than salt water was in the mix during the flood, as the Mayan Popul Vuh story claims?
I have no idea how salt water becomes salty, or why the Dead Sea and Salt Lake have salt or why their is salt in mountian lakes.
I dont believe it proves anything, I dont believe your wrong, I am not a scientist just happen to learn that fact while fishing.

What I underestood the OP to say was that if there was a world wide flood how could we have fresh water fish, how would they have survived, that a flood should have contaminated all waters. I was just explaining the science that would prevent that.
 
Last edited:
K

kenisyes

Guest
#35
Wrong, because God explicitly told Noah that everything with the breath of God in its nostrils would die in the Flood, except those who were on that boat.
As in the verses around that, "all" in Hebrew does not mean "all" in Greek or in English. It means all visible to the speaker or the observer. See Strongs Hebrew 3605. The English word all, meaning without exception, is an accomodated sense. The primary meaning is "the whole of" and also includes the sense "enough". It is Aristotle who set the meaning of the English word all as meaning "without exception".
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,782
2,951
113
#37
"The fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained," Gen. 8:2

Although it is not explicit in the story in Gen. 7 account of the flood. It can be inferred from this verse, that the flood was about more than just rain. The "fountains of the deep" are waters which lay under the earth, and when the single continent, which geologists call "Pangea" was ripped apart (My thought was always perhaps a meteor tilted the earth's axis - an intentional hit on earth by God, who knew the people would not repent- but just another hypothesis, not scripture based!).

Geologists call water which comes from under the earth, and has never seen the surface of the land - juvenile water.

juvenile water

It is interesting to note that the Rift Valleys, such as the Atlantic Ridge, and the ones in the east Pacific are exactly where volcanoes are formed. So likely, a large volume of these flood waters came from beneath the ground, as well as from the "canopy" above.

As far as finding different species, which are totally unrelated to other species in places like Australia or South America, it is likely, they were released from the ark and wandered to the edges of the plates which were being separated, and in fact continue to both separate and collide in the process known as Plate Tectonics.

Of course, their could have been a few places that managed to stay above the flood waters, and the jungles of Brazil attest to "relic tropical forests" which have a higher density of species of both plants and animals than any other place in the world. In fact, these areas are being cut and burned, before the species have even been catalogued. They point to a greater density than evolution could account for, and I often wonder how many species did NOT survive the flood in most parts of the earth?

I think God created a much more amazing world than we could ever imagine, but our sin has helped to destroy much of that.
 
D

DannyC

Guest
#38
"The fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained," Gen. 8:2

Although it is not explicit in the story in Gen. 7 account of the flood. It can be inferred from this verse, that the flood was about more than just rain. The "fountains of the deep" are waters which lay under the earth, and when the single continent, which geologists call "Pangea" was ripped apart (My thought was always perhaps a meteor tilted the earth's axis - an intentional hit on earth by God, who knew the people would not repent- but just another hypothesis, not scripture based!).

Geologists call water which comes from under the earth, and has never seen the surface of the land - juvenile water.

juvenile water

It is interesting to note that the Rift Valleys, such as the Atlantic Ridge, and the ones in the east Pacific are exactly where volcanoes are formed. So likely, a large volume of these flood waters came from beneath the ground, as well as from the "canopy" above.

As far as finding different species, which are totally unrelated to other species in places like Australia or South America, it is likely, they were released from the ark and wandered to the edges of the plates which were being separated, and in fact continue to both separate and collide in the process known as Plate Tectonics.

Of course, their could have been a few places that managed to stay above the flood waters, and the jungles of Brazil attest to "relic tropical forests" which have a higher density of species of both plants and animals than any other place in the world. In fact, these areas are being cut and burned, before the species have even been catalogued. They point to a greater density than evolution could account for, and I often wonder how many species did NOT survive the flood in most parts of the earth?

I think God created a much more amazing world than we could ever imagine, but our sin has helped to destroy much of that.

I agree generally with your statements regarding plate tectonics, but that would logically result in an old earth, which is true, the earth is 4.6 billion years old, and plate tectonics if you accept them require billions of years.

My main issue is this 'canopy' hypothesis, I might be wrong but is this the 'Hovind canopy theory', if you are talking about that, then unfortunately it's completely unfounded. Also there is no evidence to suggest a major migrantory movement of all the animals from one single point i.e The ark.
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#39
The story is true as stated in the Bible, NOT as taught in Sunday school. Nowhere does the Bible say ONLY eight people were saved. Look it up and check carefully. There were parts of the rest of the world that got saved, too.
so something like this...

local-flood.jpg
 
S

stek

Guest
#40
LOL, at RBS picture. I think kenisyes is trying to say that only a certian area like between the Rockies and the Appalachian Mountians were flooded. That the flood did not kill anyone outside that area. That is what I think he is saying. I know National geographic did a story on the Ark and that was their plausable way for it to have happened.